<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  	<channel>
    	<title>CE Delft - Elektriciteit  en infra</title>
		<copyright>Copyright (c) 2010, CE Delft</copyright>
		<link>http://www.ce.nl/ce/rapporten/114/</link>
        <atom:link href="http://www.ce.nl/index.php?go=home.showRapportenRSS&amp;pagenr=561" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<language>nl</language>
		<description>CE Delft Rich Site Summary</description>
		<webMaster>webmaster@ce.nl (Webmaster)</webMaster>
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Dutch Energy Efficiency Benchmarking Covenant: Results and energy tax exemptions]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/dutch_energy_efficiency_benchmarking_covenant%3A_results_and_energy_tax_exemptions/1072</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/dutch_energy_efficiency_benchmarking_covenant%3A_results_and_energy_tax_exemptions/1072</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Energy-intensive companies in the Netherlands have made too little progress in recent years on improving their energy performance, while at same time enjoying a reduced Energy Tax rate. A study by CE Delft on the impact of the Energy Efficiency Benchmarking Covenant shows that between 1999 and 2007 energy-intensive industries improved their efficiency by only half a percent per annum. In certain sectors like refineries, primary metals and chemicals, energy savings were in fact lower than to be expected on the basis of autonomous trends (without the Covenant).

When this negotiated agreement came into force, energy efficiency was on average 3.7% better than &amp;lsquo;World Best&amp;rsquo;, while in 2012 it is anticipated to be 0.7% worse. &amp;lsquo;World Best&amp;rsquo; is defined in the Covenant as the 10% most energy-efficient companies in the world. The study was carried out for the Netherlands Society for Nature and Environment (Stichting Natuur en Milieu).
&amp;nbsp;]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 09:59:21 +0200</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[An energy tax benchmark for greenhouse horticulture]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/an_energy_tax_benchmark_for_greenhouse_horticulture/1053</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/an_energy_tax_benchmark_for_greenhouse_horticulture/1053</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[With its energy-intensive and at the same time small-scale operations, Dutch greenhouse horticulture is held to be subject to disproportionately high Energy Tax rates. As a compensatory measure a so-called agricultural tariff was introduced a number of years ago, i.e. a lower tax rate on gas consumption specifically for horticulture. The question of whether this tariff can and should be extended for a further period is now on the table, because approval for 2011 and 2012 is soon to be sought from the European Commission in Brussels. To this end a better understanding is required of the energy intensity of the greenhouse horticulture sector and the tax burden of the Energy Tax in comparison with other energy-intensive sectors of the Dutch economy.
At the request of the Dutch Horticultural Product Board and the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality,&amp;nbsp; CE Delft and the Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI) have compared the energy costs and Energy Tax burden of the greenhouse horticulture sector with those of industrial sectors. The aim of the study was twofold:&amp;nbsp;

    To provide insight into the energy costs and energy tax burden of greenhouse horticulture compared with industrial sectors.
    To identify promising feedback mechanisms that would permit abolition of the lower tariff for greenhouse horticulture.

Conclusions
A comparison with industry shows that greenhouse horticulture is one of the most energy-intensive sectors of the Dutch economy, paying markedly more Energy Tax per unit turnover than industry. This holds whether the agricultural tariff or the general tariff is paid. Because of the small-scale nature of greenhouse horticulture, the Energy Tax paid on natural gas (with limited consumption in the cheaper tax bands) makes up a relatively high proportion of operating costs. As a result, a higher Energy Tax rate may have a greater impact on the competitiveness of greenhouse horticulture compared with industry. This confirms that the rationale behind initial introduction of the agricultural tariff is still valid.
Although various feedback mechanisms are theoretically conceivable to compensate for the increased outlay if the agricultural tariff is abolished, implementation will not be straightforward. With some of the options (feedback via income tax and corporation tax) the potential for adequate compensation of the increased tax burden for greenhouse horticulture is problematical. Serious consideration should be given to feedback options based on energy efficiency subsidies and a CO2 benchmark. Further study on these issues is required.&amp;nbsp;]]></description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:48:37 +0200</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Does the energy intensive industry obtain windfall profits through the EU ETS?]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/does_the_energy_intensive_industry_obtain_windfall_profits_through_the_eu_ets/1038</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/does_the_energy_intensive_industry_obtain_windfall_profits_through_the_eu_ets/1038</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Emission trading schemes belong to the most efficient and effective policy options to achieve a given emission reduction target. In an emission trading system, each source of pollution gets a certain amount allowances that give the &amp;lsquo;right&amp;rsquo; to emit one unit of pollution. By reducing the amount of allowances issued, the system can achieve emission reductions among its participants. By allowing the allowances to be traded on an organized exchange, the market assures that these reductions are achieved at the least possible cost for participants.

In theory, the efficiency of the system is achieved regardless of the initial allocation method. Allocation methods most often considered are auctioning and free allocation. Because free allocation impacts less on the costs for companies, it is believed to be a better system in the context of unilateral climate policies. Through free allocation, companies face less cost disadvantages compared to producers that do not fall under a climate policy regime. Free allocation would therefore have less distortive impacts on trade and economic growth - allowing EU producers to compete at lower price levels than would be possible under an auctioning regime.

However, this belief in the benefits of free allocation crucially hinges on the assumption that companies do not pass through the opportunity costs of their freely obtained allowances in the product prices. If they would pass through the market value of the freely obtained allowances, product prices would rise and the impacts on trade and competitiveness of a system of free allocation would be similar to that of auctioning. The only effect of free allocation would then be that companies gain windfall profits through the emission trading system and income from citizens will be transferred to business. This would be a particularly unfavourable outcome in the European context, where free allocation is presented as a solution towards carbon leakage. 

Economic theory tells us that companies will pass through the costs of the freely obtained allowances in most circumstances &amp;ndash; even if this will bring them a competitive disadvantage to producers not due to climate policies. According to economic theory, companies are profit-maximizing institutions that prefer profitability on invested capital over maintaining market shares. If passing through the opportunity costs in product prices can enhance their profitability, they will do so even if this would bring them some harm in terms of loss of market shares, as long as the additional profits do outweigh the additional costs. How much the firms will be able to pass the costs on depends on market structure and on elasticity of demand and supply. Theoretical analysis shows that typically, assuming linear demand and supply curves, the firms will be able to pass from 50% of increase in marginal costs due to the EU ETS (under the monopoly) to a 100% (under perfect competition). How much the increase in marginal costs reflects the carbon price depends on elasticity of supply and demand. Assuming non-linear demand and supply curves implies different rules and a possibility to pass on more than a 100% of additional costs due to the EU ETS. 

We have tested the hypothesis that energy intensive companies did not pass through the costs of their freely obtained allowances during Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the European emission trading system the EU ETS. The EU emissions trading scheme (EU ETS) was launched in 2005 to cap CO2 emissions from large industrial facilities and electricity producers. Covering over 10,000 installations, it is the largest international emission trading system in the world. During Phase 1 (from 2005-2007) and Phase 2 (from 2008 till 2012), allowances were issued for free to the energy intensive industries in all member countries. The question is whether the value of these free allowances have been forwarded in the price of EU products, signalling windfall profits, or that EU producers did not do that. 

This is investigated using econometric methods stemming from the concept of co-integration and market integration. The idea is that several dependencies exist between EU and non-EU markets through the prices of inputs in production processes and the prices of outputs on the various markets. If, for instance, prices of iron ores increase in Asia, they are likely to start to increase in Europe as well. This will put an upward pressure on the price of steel in both Europe and Asia. If Asian steel prices increase due to local shortages, this will also put an upward pressure on European steel prices as a larger portion of European steel will be shipped to Asia. In this system of market dependencies, it can then be investigated if the price of an emission allowance at the European ETS market is a significant variable for the variation in prices between EU and non-EU products over time. 

A standardized estimation procedure was developed (co-developed and reviewed by three independent econometricians) in order to come up with robust outcomes (and preventing data mining and spurious outcomes). This estimation procedure was subsequently applied to a few selected products from the iron and steel, refineries and (petro)-chemical industries. For these products, prices were compared between the EU and the US and it was investigated to what extent European prices were influenced by price developments on the EU ETS markets. 

The outcomes of the econometric analyses show that for most products a significant influence of the EUA prices on the European product prices can be found. For products from the refineries sectors (gasoil, diesel and gasoline) a quite direct influence can be found. Within two weeks are higher prices on the EU ETS markets translated into higher prices on the German markets for diesel and gasoline. For gasoil traded in Rotterdam an immediate price increasing effect from CO2 prices can be found. For the products of the iron and steel sectors (hot and cold rolled coil), a significant influence of CO2 prices can be found after one month, while for polyethylene, polystyrene and polyvinylchloride a delayed influence from 3-8 weeks can be found. 

The cost-pass-through rates from the econometric estimations show that for products of the refineries sector full cost-pass-through rates are likely. The econometric results even suggest that more than 100% of the costs were passed through, but this cannot be stated with certainty. For both steel varieties, the cost-pass-through was close to 100%. The same value was found for polyvinylchloride and polyethylene. For polystyrene the cost-pass-through rate was significant but much lower at 33%. 

These results cannot be directly interpreted in amount of windfall profits, as we have no information on the individual emissions stemming from producing these products. However, if the full cost-pass-through rates would prevail for all products in the refineries and iron and steel sectors, it can be calculated that the total amount of windfall profits would equal &amp;euro; 14 billion between 2005 and 2008. This implies a substantial transfer of money from consumers to the energy intensive industry. 

This research hence results in the conclusion that there is ample evidence that the energy intensive industry has passed through the prices of their freely obtained allowances during Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the EU ETS. This has generated windfall profits in these sectors. The cost price increase is identical as it would have been under an auctioning regime but without the possibility that governments would have to compensate consumers by recycling auction revenues. Politicians seem to have underestimated the potential of windfall profits in exposed sectors and have believed overall the claims of industry that additional costs cannot be passed through. The higher prices on the EU markets may have stimulated imports from non-EU producers but this was not quantitatively assessed in this study. The results, however, do point at the suggestion that free allocation falls short of its intentional goals: to prevent carbon leakage. Under free allocation both windfall profits and carbon leakage may be stimulated.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 11:47:02 +0200</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Renewable energy market?]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/renewable_energy_market/979</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/renewable_energy_market/979</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Without additional policy, renewable energy targets will not be met 

After a period with virtually no newbuild of power plant in the Netherlands, in the years ahead capacity is set to surge. Although some of the new gas- and coal-fired plant will replace older facilities, on balance it there will be a major increase in installed capacity, which by 2020 will up by 70% to 40 GW. Dutch electricity demand is expected to grow from 120 TWh in 2008 to 145 TWh in 2020, an increase of 20%. 

Dutch generating capacity must be assessed in the context of the north-west European electricity market, as some of the country&amp;rsquo;s output can be exported to neighbouring countries. As things stand at the moment, there is sufficient technical capacity for exporting 20% of current output, a figure that is even expected to rise. But because substantial new generating capacity is also being built in neighbouring countries, which also have ambitious targets for renewable energy, opportunities for export are economically constrained. 

With installed capacity set to rise by 70% and domestic demand by only 20%, with only limited scope for export (i.e. limited foreign demand), overcapacity will result. This will have an adverse impact on the investment climate for renewables. Although the subsidy scheme in place for renewables means generators can produce this electricity competitively, the arrangements in force are still too non-committal. As energy companies have no say in the Netherlands&amp;rsquo; renewable energy targets, with overcapacity in conventional capacity looming they cannot be expected to invest in renewables, too. Generators have no direct interest in such investments, because the incentives (prices, subsidies, obligations) are still insufficiently aligned with the government&amp;rsquo;s energy and climate programme (&amp;lsquo;Clean and Efficient&amp;rsquo;). As a result, these industries see investment in conventional plant as more appealing than developing renewables.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:47:51 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Profitability of cogeneration ]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/profitability_of_cogeneration_/981</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/profitability_of_cogeneration_/981</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[In a communication dated 23 February, 2009 (28665, no. 100) the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs stated that new-build cogeneration plant in the Netherlands can in almost all instances compete with other types of generating capacity and consequently require no financial support from the government. In underpinning this conclusion, the ministry used data calculated by the Netherlands Energy Research Centre, ECN, in a report entitled (in translation) &amp;lsquo;Price differential calculations for new cogeneration capacity, 2009&amp;rsquo;. A number of sectors operating cogeneration facilities have protested at the ministry&amp;rsquo;s conclusion and the decision not to introduce a subsidy for new-build capacity.

Further to a parliamentary motion by Vendrik and Zijlstra (no. 31239/44), CE Delft has been commissioned to give a second opinion on the model used and the ECN data as well as the route by which the ministry has arrived at the conclusion that (virtually) all categories of cogeneration can be profitably operated.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:48:51 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[IPO Heat Routemap]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/ipo_heat_routemap/958</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/ipo_heat_routemap/958</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[There are major energy savings to be achieved by making more effective use of industrial waste heat, underground storage of cold and heat, and geothermal energy. In a Climate Accord between the Dutch government and the Association of Netherlands Provincial Authorities (IPO) a pledge has been made to secure 50 PJ of that potential by 2020. 

In practice it often proves far harder to get projects off the ground than on paper, though, and so IPO commissioned CE Delft to elaborate the roles that can best be played by provincial authorities in this context. To this end, all existing and promising waste-heat supply sites were first inventoried. In interviews with provincial representatives and stakeholders, problem areas and potential strategies for tackling them were then identified.
&amp;nbsp;
The role of provincial authorities proves to be mainly that of &amp;lsquo;initiator&amp;rsquo;, by systematically inventorying promising sites, for example, and by giving projects a kick-start by getting relevant parties talking. Utilisation of waste heat is an issue that has already received considerable attention from national government, through creation of the Heat Expertise Centre, for example. To complement these efforts, the government should review current legislation, particularly on groundwater (Water Act), the deep subsurface (Mine Act) and waste heat, to enable provincial authorities and others to effectively steer towards effective use of the available heat and cold potential. 

IPO is using the results of the project to finalise arrangements on implementing the aforementioned Climate Accord.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:22:42 +0200</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Study Visit Oxy Fuel Power Plant Vattenfall]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/study_visit_oxy_fuel_power_plant_vattenfall/923</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/study_visit_oxy_fuel_power_plant_vattenfall/923</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[CE Delft recently organised a study trip to a German pilot plant for CO2 storage being rolled out by the international energy company Vattenfall. This 30 MW demo power plant based on oxy fuel technology is one of the first power plants equipped with capture of CO2. The twenty participants from industry, government and research institutions were keen to learn more about the technology.

This study visit made clear that the oxy fuel technology has as main advantages:
&amp;middot;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Low rest-emissions of CO2; almost 100% capture possible.
&amp;middot;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Emissions of NOx, SO2 and particulate matter can be almost neglible. 
&amp;middot;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Technology fits well with existing technology on modern &amp;lsquo;conventional&amp;rsquo;, making it possible to scale up soon.

Vattenfall foresees scaling up the technology to 250 MW in 2015 and 1,000 MW in 2020. By 2030 the target is a net cost of &amp;euro; 20/ton CO2 avoided. In return, the delegation informed Vattenfall about the LNG Oxy Fuel concept and ongoing developments in the ports of Rotterdam and Eemshaven. CE Delft has prepared a report on the trip. 

The study trip was organised by CE Delft at the request of Deltalinqs, the association of industries operating at Rotterdam port. ]]></description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:05:28 +0200</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[External costs of coal]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/external_costs_of_coal/878</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/external_costs_of_coal/878</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The report estimates the global annual value of external costs related to coal combustion and mining. Three types of factors have been examined: costs for the society attributable to climate change, human health impacts that result from air pollution and fatalities due to major accidents resulting from mining. Selection of countries included in calculations is based on global ranking of CO2 emissions. Over 90% of global emissions have been taken into account in calculations. The rates of damages per tonne of pollutants which have been used in calculations are based on the results of the NEEDS project (from the ExternE series). Combining all damages, we arrive at a total annual damage figure of approximately 357 billion Euro in the year 2007. This estimate is conservative, as not all emissions have been covered and not all possible damages have been valued. The highest damages can be attributed to coal combustion - about 99% of the total value. The largest contribution is due to SO2 emissions, with 38%. The contribution of CO2 is similar - about 37%, NOx contributes 14% and fine particles 11%. The report has been prepared for Greenpeace International. Greenpeace has used its findings in launching a global campaign against excessive use of coal for power production, in order to raise global awareness about damages related to coal in different stages of its production and use.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 11:12:56 +0200</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Transition strategy for electricity heat]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/transition_strategy_for_electricity_heat/897</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/transition_strategy_for_electricity_heat/897</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The Regieorgaan Energietransitie, the body responsible for coordinating a move to greener energy systems in the Netherlands, has drawn up a strategy for making the production of electricity and heat/cold more sustainable. The strategy comprises the following elements:

    maximum energy conservation
    priority for renewable capacity and energy-efficient cogeneration
    consequently, less scope for new &amp;lsquo;must-run&amp;rsquo;, baseload capacity&amp;hellip;
    &amp;hellip;along with greater need for flexible, &amp;lsquo;quick-fire&amp;rsquo; gas-fired capacity
    initially &amp;lsquo;gas&amp;rsquo; can be natural gas, but with growing use of coal gas and biogas with time.

For this study, in which CE Delft teamed up with Jan Paul van Soest&amp;rsquo;s Sustainability Consulting this strategy was further underpinned and its robustness assessed in a series of computer simulations at Delft Technological University. These calculations show that in the generating system operated in north-west Europe &amp;lsquo;must-run&amp;rsquo; capacity&amp;nbsp; and renewable capacity are at odds with one another. If the Dutch government&amp;rsquo;s major policy programme &amp;lsquo;Clean and Efficient&amp;rsquo; is implemented as planned, there will be very little scope for (new) baseload capacity. One good way of integrating the fluctuating supply of renewable energy (particularly wind) into the system is to use &amp;lsquo;quick-fire&amp;rsquo; generating capacity burning gas. In the relatively short term (by around 2020-2025) this is the only realistic route for integrating wind power.



    
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 10:17:05 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Vision on achieving a major share of renewables]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/vision_on_achieving_a_major_share_of_renewables/892</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/vision_on_achieving_a_major_share_of_renewables/892</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[This report contains the joint recommendations of environmental NGOs, trades unions and energy companies for a future stimulus package for renewable electricity. What all these parties would like to see is a major role for renewable power by the year 2020. The recommendations have been underwritten by the Netherlands Society for Nature and Environment (Stichting Natuur and Milieu), Energy Ned, Nuon, Esent, Eneco, Greenchoice, Greenpeace, the Dutch umbrella organisation on renewable energy and the trades union ABVAKABO FNV, and were facilitated by CE Delft. The resultant document represents a bridge between Green4sure &amp;ndash; the energy plan put forward by the environmental NGOs and trades unions &amp;ndash; and the Energy Agenda 2030 proposed by the energy sector.

The parties argue for a stable set of market instruments to structurally bridge the gap in cost price between renewable and conventional electricity. In 2020 renewable technologies will still be more expensive than their conventional counterparts. Although the current &amp;lsquo;SDE&amp;rsquo; scheme forms a good policy tool for bridging this cost-price differential (the so-called &amp;lsquo;inefficient top&amp;rsquo;) in the coming years, it needs to be improved in two important ways. In the first place it is essential that long-term political commitment be formally laid down for the investments associated with securing the targets. The second area requiring improvement according to the parties is that the funding mechanism for the SDE should be via the electricity price rather than coming from the national budget. 

To stimulate renewable energy production from 2015 onwards, the organisations argue for introduction of an EU-wide commitment by a &amp;lsquo;frontrunner group&amp;rsquo;, possibly including the UK, Poland, Sweden and Belgium. The aim of such a move would be to introduce an &amp;lsquo;escalator&amp;rsquo; under which member states are obliged to annually increase the share of renewables used in meeting national electricity demand. Such a scheme would be tied to a number of solid conditions, including a well-functioning system of &amp;lsquo;green certificates&amp;rsquo; for use among participating countries.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:22:10 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Social impact of air pollution reduction]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/social_impact_of_air_pollution_reduction/864</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/social_impact_of_air_pollution_reduction/864</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The NEC directive, an EU directive laying down emission ceilings for a range of air pollutants for all member states, is about to be amended. This report describes the results of a social cost-benefit analysis (SCBA) of possible new NEC targets for 2020, making due allowance for the impact of an intensification of Dutch climate policy on emissions of NEC pollutants. Policies already scheduled for implementation were included in a ‘zero variant’. The study is to serve as part of the input for establishing the Dutch position in negotiations within the EU on the level of the emission ceilings. 

The net present value of all impacts to which a price was assigned amounts to around minus 1.7 billion Euro. In the ‘project variant’ the net present value of the external effects was calculated as 5.2 billion Euro (with benefits to nature being taken along as an as yet unvalued item). The main factor on the benefit side was reduced mortality due to exposure to airborne particulates. This 
involves both primary and secondary particles, implying that these benefits also depend on cuts in NH3, NOx and SO2 emissions.

Chronic bronchitis and days of illness (hours/days lost at work) due to exposure to particulates also play a significant role in the SCBA. The other effects contribute only marginally to the analysis results.

A comparison of the discounted costs with the benefits shows that a tightening of NEC targets is an efficient form of policy, with the benefits of 3.5 billion Euro clearly well in excess of the costs. This conclusion remains valid even if a lower value (than is customary) is assigned to the health effects of improved air quality. The benefits will be even greater (their monetary value will be even more positive) if impacts on nature and ecosystems are also included in the equation. In a tentative analysis we show that in this study benefits to nature may amount to as much as 20% of the health benefits. 

The costs of tightening the NEC targets are borne by the various sectors, but appear to be affordable to society as a whole. Ultimately, most of the costs will be passed on to private citizens. The benefits of the NEC targets accrue to all citizens benefiting from cleaner air. In the Netherlands the benefits arise largely through measures to concurrently reduce the NH3 and primary particulate emissions of Dutch agriculture and measures taken in neighbouring countries to cut particulate emissions.
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Impacts on Competitiveness from EU ETS]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/impacts_on_competitiveness_from_eu_ets/835</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/impacts_on_competitiveness_from_eu_ets/835</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The EU emissions trading scheme (ETS) was launched in 2005 to cap CO2 emissions from large industrial facilities and electricity producers. The European Commission is currently designing the post 2012 EU ETS, as outlined in COM(2008)16. Novel to this system is that a greater part of the rights will be auctioned. Auctioning in general assures a greater deal of efficiency compared to (certain types of) free allocation, lowers the administrative costs and prevents eventual windfall profits.   However, auctioning also implies a potential loss of competitiveness for industry. If no international agreement on future climate policies is reached, firms may not be able to pass on the higher costs to their customers and may be faced with a loss in profitability and the threat of import substitution. In any emission trading scheme with an absolute cap, a relocation of production that is not covered by CO2 targets implies an increase in global CO2 emissions. This phenomenon has been labelled as &amp;lsquo;carbon leakage&amp;rsquo;. To prevent carbon leakage, the Commission has proposed to exempt exposed sectors from auctioning and allocating them rights freely on the basis of a benchmark. A severe loss of competitiveness is here the main criterion against which it is decided whether sectors will be subject to auctioning or free allocation.  This study has investigated which industrial sectors of the Dutch economy possibly face a loss of competitiveness from auctioning. The competitive position is determined by the combination of significant potential cost price increases and substantial imports and export flows to countries that have no comparable climate change policy. It appears that especially in the aluminium, fertilizer, iron and steel , inorganic and other base chemicals sectors relatively high cost price increases can be expected which may not be fully passed on to their customers. Profitability in these sectors may be reduced and the risk of carbon leakage increased.   However, in terms of impacts on the national economy (i.e. GDP) the effects are probably small. The direct costs of EU ETS are 0,2% of GDP (for an emission price of &amp;euro;20/ton CO2) of which about half can be passed on to the customers. Impacts on the competitive position may occur in the vulnerable sectors but these sectors are in general the smaller sectors of the Dutch economy - with the exception of the iron and steel industry (in total 1,1% of GDP). In addition, if international climate policy until the year 2020 will result in more countries agreeing on binding reduction targets, impacts on competitiveness will be smaller than analyzed here.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 11:04:50 +0200</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Texel energy vision and implementation plan]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/texel_energy_vision_and_implementation_plan/861</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/texel_energy_vision_and_implementation_plan/861</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[In collaboration with the local authority CE Delft has developed an energy vision for the Dutch island of Texel. In doing so CE Delft elaborated the various elements of the programme on paper, with the island council taking responsibility for the implementation plan, naturally working closely together and with input from numerous residents and organisations on the island. The result is a vision that enjoys widespread support and one provided with numerous handles for concrete action over the next few years. The plans were approved by the island council in August 2008.

Texel has always been special and so, too, are its ambitions to have a fully sustainable energy supply in 2020. This document first delineates these ambitions as precisely as possible, going on to examine the options available for the various forms of energy use and for stepwise realisation of the goals. The emphasis is on what is feasible, not on what is not. In the process of developing the vision, use was made of transformation charts and other pictorial aids giving insight into what steps need to be taken at what point in time and where. 

On Texel there is plenty of scope for making a success of these efforts. In the past there have already been numerous (pilot) projects in the field of energy conservation and renewable energy, but there is nonetheless a wide chasm between the situation today and ambitions for 2020. We now enter a phase of achieving ‘focus’ on the one hand and ‘volume’ on the other. This will include setting up an organisation to implement the programme. Much depends on the support that is forthcoming from Texel’s population and business community. In technical terms it is feasible; if the will is there, so too will be the way.
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Greening the tax system]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/greening_the_tax_system/909</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/greening_the_tax_system/909</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[At the request of the Dutch Environment ministry (VROM) CE Delft has assessed the environmental effectiveness of 15 fiscal measures included in the government&amp;rsquo;s 2009 Tax Plan. The measures relate to traffic and transport (e.g. differentiation of Vehicle Purchase Tax according to absolute CO2 emissions), household energy consumption and industry (e.g. an increase in energy tax) and the built environment (e.g. an income tax deduction indexed to energy performance of the home). Besides their environmental effectiveness, these &amp;lsquo;tax-greening&amp;rsquo; measures were also assessed with respect to competition effects for Dutch industry, political support, impact on spending power and burden-sharing, coherence within the specific context of environmental policy, fiscal compatibility and enforceability. The results of the study are to be used in preparing the present government&amp;rsquo;s &amp;lsquo;second round&amp;rsquo; of tax-greening measures.

The overall package will lead to cuts in CO2 emissions of around 0.74 Mt in 2010 and 1.5 Mt in 2020. These figures should be seen as the lower bound of actual effects, as some of these proved unquantifiable. The overall impact of the tax-greening package thus represents some 4 to 7% of the government&amp;rsquo;s climate aspirations for 2020 with respect to the built environment and transport sectors. ]]></description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 14:18:19 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[The LNG/oxyfuel route for new coal plants.]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/the_lngoxyfuel_route_for_new_coal_plants./746</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/the_lngoxyfuel_route_for_new_coal_plants./746</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[In the ports of Rotterdam and the Eemshaven both power-plants and terminals for liquefied natural gas, LNG, are planned. In LNG-terminals a vast amount of cold is available. The enclosed report describes a route for using this cold of the LNG-terminals, integration of power plants and LNG terminals. Central is the use of cold for the production of oxygen, which in turn is used for firing oxy-fuel fired power stations. Besides, the cold can be used for CO2-compression and in the condenser-cycle of steam-turbines. The study was carried out by CE Delft on behalf of SenterNovem (program 'energy-savings and chain-efficiency in industry'). The study indicates that for one LNG-terminal and one coal-fired power plant this route results in major improvements:

    Substantial energy savings (efficiency of app. 43%, a saving of about 9 PJ 
    [this is equivalent to the total use of energy of the city of Delft]).
    Negligible emissions of nitrogen-oxydes (NOx, compared to 1,4 Mton with post-combustion capture).
    Savings in costs, due to superior energy efficiency.

Main points of attention are back-up provisions (not elaborated in the study) and the development of oxy-fuel coal technology (now at pilot stage). It is recommended to site LNG terminals and coal-fired generating capacity close together and anticipate in the design stage of new LNG terminals and power plants on integration.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:06:16 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[CO2 emissions of Amsterdam boroughs]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/co2_emissions_of_amsterdam_boroughs/830</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/co2_emissions_of_amsterdam_boroughs/830</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[This brief report presents energy consumption and CO2 emissions data for each of Amsterdams boroughs (stadsdelen), for households and for trade and industry. These research results, from the report Building blocks for Amsterdams CO2 abatement programme (in Dutch), have been brought together separately to give borough environmental policy coordinators a handy refer-ence document. As such, it is more of an extract from the main report rather than an independent research result.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:18:32 +0200</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Energy saving by Delft businesses: Prioritisation of enterprises and an effective procedure]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/energy_saving_by_delft_businesses%3A_prioritisation_of_enterprises_and_an_effective_procedure/829</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/energy_saving_by_delft_businesses%3A_prioritisation_of_enterprises_and_an_effective_procedure/829</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[For the 1500 small and medium-sized businesses (SME) in Delft the local authority is responsible for implementing the Environmental Control Act, one element of which concerns energy saving. The authority asked CE Delft to assess how this particular issue could best be tackled: 

- which businesses should be afforded priority? 
- what approach can best be adopted for these SME?  

The project started by inventorying the relevant businesses and their energy consumption and CO2 emissions. The total CO2 emissions of the Delft busi-ness community are around 150 kt. Apart from a few major institutions like the in the order of 15-30%.  Next a workshop was held with staff from the local authority's specialist Envi-ronment team. On this occasion the decision was made that in the future a clear distinction should be made between big and small energy users. The former will have a pre-arranged visit geared specifically to energy saving, us-ing a checklist to assess whether available cost-effective measures have in-deed been implemented. With small-scale users the main focus will be on pro-viding information, via the folders put out by organisations like Energiecentrum MKB (Energy Centre for SME) and Infomil.   For 2008 the priorities are the so-called MJA-II enterprises (tackling of free-riders), new construction work (harmonisation with building inspectorate) and supermarkets (mandatory covering of refrigerated cabinets).]]></description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:43:00 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Environmental policy for power stations]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/environmental_policy_for_power_stations/676</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/environmental_policy_for_power_stations/676</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[At the moment, ambitious CO2 emission reduction goals co-exist with continued existence and even building of high-emission power plants in the Netherlands. This study identifies two explanations for this situation. First, long-term public policy regarding climate change is so vague that companies are not able to take them into account when they make investment decisions. It concerns, among others, the uncertain design of the European Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) after 2012. Second, the Dutch allocation mechanism of emission rights under the EU ETS appears to be biased towards high-carbon technologies and allows strategic firm behaviour.  The policy consequences of these findings are twofold. First, efforts need to be undertaken to improve the distribution of emission rights among participants. Benchmarking can be done, but it should be as independent of historic use and fuel type as possible. The auctioning of emission permits is also an option. Whether significant alternations to the EU ETS system will be made and which changes are to be expected is, however, uncertain. It highly dependents on the political climate in Brussels and in other EU member states. Therefore, govern-ment regulation might also be needed in the short term. It would direct firms into the right direction by stimulating the adoption of no regret technical measures.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:56:02 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Building blocks for Amsterdam’s CO2 reduction programme]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/building_blocks_for_amsterdam%92s_co2_reduction_programme/754</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/building_blocks_for_amsterdam%92s_co2_reduction_programme/754</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The Amsterdam local authority has set itself the target of reducing the city’s annual CO2 emissions by 40% in 2025 compared with 1990 and making the municipal organi-sation carbon-neutral by 2015. These are ambitious targets that demand a vigorous and efficient strategy.

CE Delft was commissioned by the authority to review the city’s carbon emissions in 1990 and 2006 and make a projection for 2025, in each case providing a sectoral breakdown. In addition. an extensive list of possible measures was drawn up (the so-called ‘long list’), indicating their potential contribution to securing the target, their lead time and their cost-effectiveness. On this basis it was concluded that the envisaged target is feasible, but that it will require a maximum effort from all parties. Securing it will depend in part on how successful national and European climate policies prove to be and will require the active participation of the city’s businesses and citizens.

It is as yet impossible to identify concrete reduction measures for securing the full tar-get, but given the project’s horizon this is not yet necessary, for innovation is still taking place. What is important is that concrete steps be taken as soon as possible to reverse the upward trend in carbon emissions over the past 15 years and start making substan-tial cuts. 

Finally, recommendations are made for a monitoring strategy for the CO2 reduction programme, allowing progress to be followed and assessed from time to time and due corrective action to be taken should this prove necessary.

]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Market survey on decentralised CHP capacity]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/market_survey_on_decentralised_chp_capacity/826</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/market_survey_on_decentralised_chp_capacity/826</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[TenneT has drawn up its Quality and Capacity Plan for the period 2008-2014 and for this purpose required a robust review of trends in decentralised com-bined heat and power (CHP) capacity and utilisation thereof. CE Delft was commissioned to carry out this review on the basis of its own expertise and experience and interviews with a number of relevant players. The results were translated into terms of four scenarios used as standard practice in TenneT’s plans. In these scenarios, growth of CHP capacity ranges from 1500 MWe to 3300 MWe between 2008 and 2014. This means total CHP capacity will lag behind the growth rate envisaged by the government. With dedicated addi-tional incentive policy the desired level can be achieved, though, up to a maximum of 7000 MWe new CHP capacity, but this gives no consideration to cost effectiveness.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[The Natural Gas Chain*]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/the_natural_gas_chain%2A/552</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/the_natural_gas_chain%2A/552</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Costs and environmental impact are important drivers for investigating the natural gas life cycle. Environmental impact will more and more become an important subject in industry policy and strategy. While natural gas is now performing well in terms of environmental profile with respect to other fossil energy sources, continued efforts will be essential to keep this position in a changing market and with other fossil fuels working on their environmental impacts.    The International Gas Union (IGU) therefore started a life-cycle initiative for the natural gas chain. The aim is to collect and structure industry data on consumptions and emissions along the life cycle of natural gas. The CE report describes the initiation of the life-cycle inventory and intitial findings.    One of the main issues in the natural gas chain is the loss of product through fugitive emissions and venting or flaring. Natural gas &amp;ndash; methane &amp;ndash; has a high global warming impact and therefore product loss and climate impact are closely related. This means that reducing losses leads to improved economic as well as environmental performance. In order to identify the &amp;ndash; most attractive &amp;ndash; options for improvement, further expansion of the life-cycle database is desirable. Nevertheless, the data collected in this project do cover a fair fraction of the global volume and give useful first insight into issues as well as options along the gas chain.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:57:43 +0200</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Energy in the greater Rotterdam region 2007]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/energy_in_the_greater_rotterdam_region_2007/568</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/energy_in_the_greater_rotterdam_region_2007/568</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[For a number of years several local government agencies in the Rijnmond industrial area round Rotterdam have been collaborating on an environmental monitoring programme, publishing a comprehensive environmental status report each year, the MSR review. Given the relevance of energy issues for Rotterdam, this year energy was in the spotlight and CE Delft was commissioned to prepare a thematic sub-report entitled ‘Energy in Rijnmond’, providing a detailed review of Rijnmond’s energy flows. For each of the relevant policy target groups the report inventories emissions, trends, possible abatement measures and the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders. One of the areas of focus is the industry/energy complex, because of the massive flows of energy and CO2 in this area and the substantial investments scheduled in the years ahead. The report concludes with recommendations on regional policies and how they might be monitored.

The report will be used to underpin the Rotterdam Climate Initiative, an ambitious plan drawn up by local government in the Rotterdam district to secure a 50% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2025. In May 2007 a delegation from the city presented the English-language version to Bill Clinton, leader of the New York-based Clinton Climate Initiative.

]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:21 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Green4sure; A Green Energy Plan*]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/green4sure%3B_a_green_energy_plan%2A/550</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/green4sure%3B_a_green_energy_plan%2A/550</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[On June 5th Dutch environment minister Jacqueline Cramer was presented with the final report of Green4sure, a plan to halve the Netherlands’ carbon dioxide emissions by 2030. This comprehensive and ambitious plan has been elaborated by CE Delft at the request of six of the country’s major trades unions and environmental NGOs. At the heart of the plan is introduction of a system of emission allowances for all energy consumers, either individually (industry, electrical power generation and aviation, to be brought under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme) or collectively (the built environment and transport). To promote acceptance of these ‘climate budgets’, the required efforts and thus the costs have been differentiated according to a three-tier system: a 40% reduction for sectors under the EU ETS, -60% for the built environment and -35% for transport. The allowances for all three systems would be auctioned rather than issued. This core policy would be backed up by a variety of flanking policies, including efficiency standards for vehicles, buildings (new and existing) and appliances.

Given the evident need for urgent action and the fact that climate budgets will take a number of years to implement, Green4sure includes an array of temporary policies. One of these is an interim Power Generation Act setting a cap of 375 g/kWh on the carbon emissions of new generating plant. How this is to be achieved is up to the generator. 

The effects of the plan have been quantitatively assessed, and the targeted 50% reduction in carbon emissions can indeed be achieved, with an attendant 2.1% improvement in energy efficiency. In 2030 the overall costs will be over 4 billion euro, but these will be offset by major benefits totalling around 3 billion a year. There will be slight growth of employment. For the average household, the increase in costs will  rise to around 600 euro over 25 years, but over the same period national income will have grown by 50%. ‘Frugal’ consumers and users will be better off under Green4sure, while their ‘wasteful’ counterparts will face higher costs.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:21 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Unforeseen profits from a green energy subsidy scheme]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/unforeseen_profits_from_a_green_energy_subsidy_scheme/566</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/unforeseen_profits_from_a_green_energy_subsidy_scheme/566</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Over the past few years the Dutch government has granted more subsidies to increase the profitability of investments in on-shore wind-power projects than were in hindsight needed. In many cases the level of subsidisation was such that returns on investment were higher than what the market generally dictates; in other words, considerable extra profits were made. One of the main reasons is that the government underestimated the price of electricity.

This is the principal conclusion of a study carried out by CE Delft for the Netherlands’ Court of Audit (Algemene Rekenkamer). Last year the so-called MEP subsidy scheme for green power generation was discontinued. Under this scheme producers of electricity from biomass, solar, wind and water were eligible for a fixed subsidy per kWh. However, the sums paid out threatened to get out of hand and it was estimated, moreover, that the Netherlands would  manage to secure its target of generating 9% of domestic power sustainably by 2010 on the basis of the subsidies already issued. 

Meanwhile, though, the cabinet has formulated a higher target and announced its intention to set up a new green power subsidy scheme. The challenge in designing a follow-up to the original MEP will be to ensure equal effectiveness, but at less cost to government coffers. 

]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[New generating plant in the Netherlands]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/new_generating_plant_in_the_netherlands/564</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/new_generating_plant_in_the_netherlands/564</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Every power station has an impact on human health and the environment, not just through its own direct emissions, but also because of the supply chain emissions of the fuel it burns. The question therefore arises: does new generating capacity come at a reasonable price for consumers and society as a whole? With all the plans being floated for new power plant in the Netherlands, CE Delft has examined how these impacts (‘external costs’ in economic terms) pan out for various kinds of power station, viz.:100% biomass (from waste wood);pulverised coal, with and without added biomass;coal gasification;natural gas (in a combined cycle plant);nuclear.For valid comparison, all types of plant were taken to have a capacity of 1,000 MW and an annual output of 7,500 GWh. Impacts were assessed both with and without CO2 capture and sequestration and for two locations: Eemshaven and Maasvlakte. The analysis covered not only supply chain emissions, but also accidents, again down the full chain. In the case of CO2 emissions – a global environmental problem for which quantitative estimates of damage are still hard to give – calculations were made using several alternative prices. 

Of the non-nuclear options, coal-fired plant has the highest external costs per kWh output and biomass-fired plant burning waste wood the lowest. Only with a very low price of 9 euro/tonne assigned to CO2-related damage does gas-fired plant score best on external costs. It is only with coal-fired plant that impacts between the two alternative locations differ to any real extent, owing mainly to wind-blown dispersal of coal dust during fuel delivery and storage.

By far the most dominant factor in external costs are CO2 emissions. If these are captured and sequestered, the external costs therefore fall substantially, particularly in the case of coal-fired plant. For biomass-fired plant these costs even become negative, i.e. there are net benefits. However, it is still unclear how soon this technology will be ripe for practical implementation. 
 
In the case of nuclear power, external costs are virtually independent of the price assigned to CO2 impacts, and the same holds for plant location. However, aggregate supply-chain impacts depend very much on where the uranium fuel is sourced, as radioactive emissions at mining and processing facilities are very much lower if these facilities are operated according to ‘best practice’. As a result, the health and environmental impacts of a kWh of nuclear power may vary by up to a factor 100. 
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Background data on electricity labelling 2006]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/background_data_on_electricity_labelling_2006/518</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/background_data_on_electricity_labelling_2006/518</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Since 1 January 2005 Dutch electricity suppliers must provide information on the source of their supplies and to comply with these labelling obligations they require national production data. These data were compiled by CE and used to determine the overall fuel mix of Dutch electricity supplies in the year 2006, with the following results: natural gas (over 50%), coal (25%), nuclear (8.5%) and renewables (12%). The environmental impact of this mix, in terms of CO2 emissions and radioactive waste, is 458 g CO2 per KWh and 0.000254 g nuclear waste per KWh.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Coalitions for Energy Innovation in Europe*]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/coalitions_for_energy_innovation_in_europe%2A/751</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/coalitions_for_energy_innovation_in_europe%2A/751</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The ‘Energy Transition’ is a Dutch government initiative that seeks to achieve a struc-tured transition to sustainable energy systems. While current energy policy is con-cerned with securing targets for the year 2010, the Transition programme focuses spe-cifically on the period thereafter. The Dutch government is keen to share this approach with international partners and create alliances for the future. 

At the request of the Interdepartmental Programme on Energy Transitions (IPE) and in collaboration with the Clingendael International Programme (CIEP), CE Delft has car-ried out a pilot study to identify potential European partners for an Energy Transition approach at a strategic political and international level. The project’s guidance commit-tee comprised Messrs. F. Vollenbroek (IPE), F. Dietz (IPE), F. Berkhout (Free Univer-sity of Amsterdam) and E. Breunesse (Shell). 

The procedure adopted was to draw up a series of selection criteria, which were used to perform a quick scan of the 25 EU countries with respect to energy innovation. This led to selection of 6 countries, which were then subjected to a more detailed SWOT analysis. Representatives of these countries (Denmark, Germany, Poland, Spain, Swe-den and the United Kingdom) were then invited to a workshop in The Hague on 24 No-vember 2006 to launch joint actions and/or coalitions, using the SWOT analysis as a background document. 
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Background document to the Drenthe Provincial Air Quality programme, 2007 - 2010]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/background_document_to_the_drenthe_provincial_air_quality_programme%2C_2007_-_2010/508</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/background_document_to_the_drenthe_provincial_air_quality_programme%2C_2007_-_2010/508</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[As the background document to the Drenthe Provincial Air Quality programme shows, in 2006 current air quality standards were not exceeded in this province on any occasion. Based on current spatial plans and economic developments in the province, in 2010 too there seems little likelihood of air quality standards being exceeded. 

The air in Drenthe is thus relatively clean. But given the various uncertainties surrounding trends in air pollution (likely development of large-scale background particulate and NO&not;2concentrations, and possible introduction of more stringent European standards for particulates), we advise the Provincial Executive to monitor developments carefully. To this end, the report proposes a coherent basket of measures, which have meanwhile been implemented in a special provincial programme.
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Zuiderzee rail link]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/strategic_environmental_assessment_of_the_zuiderzee_rail_link/496</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/strategic_environmental_assessment_of_the_zuiderzee_rail_link/496</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[As part of the Structural Vision procedure for the proposed Zuiderzee rail link between Amsterdam and the north of the Netherlands, a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) was carried out on the so-called Regional Package elaborated as one of the alternatives to the link, looking specifically at major economic projects with a spatial planning dimension, known in the jargon as ‘spatio-economic projects’.   

In the current planning phase (go or no-go for the rail link), the aim of these SEAs is to inventory, in broad brushstrokes, the main environmental impacts of the various alternatives so these can be duly considered in the upcoming decision.

As far as can be judged at present, it seems unlikely that the spatio-economic projects in the Regional Package will generate any really significant environmental impacts. The ZEPP power station, the Multi-Biorefinery, the Groningen ‘Central Zone’ and possibly expansion of the TT motorcycle racing circuit at Assen are anticipated to have the greatest impact. In the case of ZEPP, there is a risk of CO2 escaping from the subsurface and during transport, as well as of changes to local hydrology. On the other hand, the use of clean power generation technology will mean lower CO2 and NOx emissions. The Multi-Biorefinery may lead to environmental gains in terms of water quality, air pollutant emissions and energy consumption. One risk here is the possibility of stench nuisance. In the ‘Central Zone’, a general increase in the scale of economic activity, and particularly in transport movements (people and goods) may have a negative impact on the living environment. The infrastructure measures to the south of Assen racing circuit may have an impact on biodiversity. As no precise locations have yet been indicated, however, the impact on nature areas forming part of the Ecological Main Structure is unclear. According to the information available, 200 ha ‘nature compensation’ will be required for the development work around the circuit.

Apart from these projects, few significant, direct, primary environmental impacts are anticipated. There may well be substantial secondary impacts, though, both positive and negative, as projects are scaled up, say, or owing to knock-on effects. This will be of greatest relevance for changes in agricultural cropping patterns and the energy supply. 

A more general secondary impact of the Regional Package will be an overall increase in economic activity in the north of the Netherlands. This will generate extra traffic and lead to development of additional commercial and housing estates. All of this will in turn again have a range of environmental impacts. This is also true of the so-called ‘accessibility alternatives’, however, although compared with full implementation of the Zuiderzee rail link the Regional Package will probably have less impact in this respect.
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[What kind of new generating plant for the Netherlands?]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/what_kind_of_new_generating_plant_for_the_netherlands/506</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/what_kind_of_new_generating_plant_for_the_netherlands/506</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[In the context of the current Dutch debate on the preferred option for new power stations in the Netherlands, CE Delft has used a cash-flow computer model, developed in-house, to calculate the cost efficiency of various types of generating plant as a function of fuel prices and CO2 prices.

The preferred option for industry and the energy sector is coal-fired generating plant, because of the lower electricity production costs. From the angle of climate policy and NEC policy, renewables or gas-fired stations are preferable, but these have higher production costs. On the other hand, future climate policy is very likely to involve introduction of higher charges for CO2 emissions, which will push up production costs, particularly in the case of coal-fired plant. One solution to this problem might be CO2 capture and sequestration. An alternative is not to go for coal or gas, but for nuclear. 

The main conclusions from CE’s analysis are as follows:From about € 20 - €40 per tonne CO2 upwards, coal-fired and gas-fired power stations with CO2 capture and sequestration are more cost-efficient than those without.With high fuel prices, and considering only CO2 impacts (and not risks or other, environmental impacts), nuclear power is the cheapest option from about € 30 per tonne CO2 upwards.With low fuel prices, Gas Turbine Combined Cycle Plant with CO2 capture and sequestration is structurally cheaper than nuclear. Cogeneration of heat and power is a better option than pure power generation: it reduces CO2 emissions by several hundred kilotonnes, creating a significant difference in the cost efficiency of the two types of plant. ]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[The future of biofeedstocks in the Netherlands]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/the_future_of_biofeedstocks_in_the_netherlands/495</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/the_future_of_biofeedstocks_in_the_netherlands/495</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[As part of its current assessment of the modalities of a long-term national transition to sustainable energy systems, the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency asked CE Delft to conduct an in-depth evaluation of the system option ‘Green Feedstocks’. For this purpose a literature study was carried out and interviews held with six people working ‘in the field’. The study provides insight into the approximate production costs and environmental burden associated with ‘biofeedstocks’, and compares these with the production costs and burden of competing, conventional petrochemical alternatives.

Based on current data, we conclude there are already plenty of technologies available and that in terms of technical feasibility a significant or even very substantial share of today’s chemical feedstocks could in principle be produced from biomass. The two main impediments to market introduction are cost price and unfamiliarity with the product on the part of potential customers. With cost prices sometimes 2 - 3 times higher than those of the conventional petrochemicals being replaced, these alternatives are often only implemented if the petrochemical in question has been banned because of its in-use environmental impact (lubricants, solvents, inks, paints) or in cases where an end-user is keen to promote a ‘green’ image (bioplastics). We found only a limited number of examples of biomass-based production being cheaper than production based on petrochemical feedstocks (ethanol, 1,3-propanediol). 
The main advantages of biofeedstocks, in terms of the life-cycle environmental impact, are the lower toxicity of a range of products during usage (lubricants, solvents, inks, paints). 
In many cases the environmental burden per unit product, in the form of greenhouse gas emissions, is only lower because a petrochemical feedstock has been substituted – and its fossil energy and carbon content therefore saved. However, biofeedstock production processes are often less energy-efficient than their petrochemical counterparts. One possible exception here is production of chemicals with a nitrogen atom. 
 
Another issue is that cultivation of oilseed rape and other protein crops involves significant greenhouse gas emissions because of the need for substantial inputs of nitrogen fertiliser. Most oil and carbohydrate crops are perennials and do not have this drawback.

A third issue when it comes to using dedicated biofeedstock crops is that land requirements may have a major environmental impact if it is unspoilt nature that is being converted to cropland. It is therefore recommended to make maximum use of biomass waste streams, or otherwise crops with an as high as possible per-hectare yield of useful crop constituents (sugarcane, sugarbeet, palm oil). 

What we also see in Europe is that the subsidies on using biomass for power generation and vehicle fuels have created an uneven playing field, with less priority being given to development of biofeedstocks and the cost of the raw materials for today’s biofeedstocks continually rising because of the massive market demand for these materials for subsidised application in the former two areas.

Given the above, our recommendations are as follows:Create a level playing field and develop an across-the-board vision on how biomass is to be used, giving due attention to both competition and potential synergies between bio-energy, biofuels, bioproducts and food.Consider introducing a temporary ‘bioproducts CO2-reduction subsidy’, similar to the present ‘kWhe biomas subsidy’.Alongside government targets for bio-energy and biofuels, consider setting a target for sustainable new bioproducts.Create a ‘decision filter’ enabling more rapid selection of promising options and routes, and rejection of others.Focus efforts on routes with clear, independently proven environmental gains and a reasonable cost equation.With respect to R&amp;D subsidies, also focus on added value in terms of reduced toxicity, possibly accompanied by appropriate legislation – prescribing use of bio-lubricants in nature areas, for example.Leave production of bulk chemicals and cultivation of the required crops to countries other than the Netherlands, and do no more on this score than support development of conversion technologies.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Particulate Action Plan for Zeeland Province]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/particulate_action_plan_for_zeeland_province/467</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/particulate_action_plan_for_zeeland_province/467</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Zeeland is just one of the provinces of the Netherlands where airborne particulates are posing a growing problem in terms of air quality. Given the tighter European air quality standards scheduled for 2010, that problem can only get worse, moreover. When it comes to assessing the options for reducing particulate emissions, the Provincial Executive of Zeeland is therefore keen to start work now. Against this background CE Delft was asked to provide support in drawing up an action plan with which to improve air quality in the province.

On the one hand this means reviewing all kinds of (technical) measures with their associated impacts and features. Equally important, though, is to explore the extent to which any measures will enjoy adequate support.  

Who are the players engaged with this issue? And who is to take the lead in implementing measures? From this amalgam of research activities a number of policy options will emerge, which can then be used to draw up an action plan that will have sufficient support from the various players.

]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[’Market & Environment’ in the built environment]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/%92market_+en+_environment%92_in_the_built_environment/430</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/%92market_+en+_environment%92_in_the_built_environment/430</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[As a follow-up to the 2003 ‘Market &amp; Environment’ manifesto, a broad alliance of Dutch businesses and NGOs as well as several ministries have been discussing ways of achieving a 50% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions in the built environment and in greenhouse horticulture. In pursuit of this aim an action plan was drawn up, which was recently presented by CE. The challenge was substantial, as the goal was not to develop novel technologies or technical measures, but to identify the options available to government and industry for implementing those that already exist.

Until now the main focus of government and industry has been on promoting innovation, i.e. developing new technologies. All too often, though, the essential next step – scaling-up and actual market introduction – fails to get off the ground, as the innovations struggle to secure a place in today’s markets. Again and again, there proves to be no market for most of the innovations concerned and consequently little if any progress towards sustainable development. As things currently stand, sustainable options and practices manage to penetrate only very modest market niches, outside of which investments are simply too high and financial returns too low. As with any other economic activity, sustainable technologies and activities must bring in revenue, and there is thus a need for some form of market regulation to alter the playing field.

After a year of discussions the parties were unable to draw up a consensus document on these issues and CE Delft therefore decided to prepare an action plan itself. The time is not yet apparently ripe for a broad alliance of this kind to establish a common platform on sustainability. There was, nonetheless, broad satisfaction with the course of the discussions, because they made it clear to all concerned that solid environmental ambitions inevitably require far-reaching measures, but that for many parties these are still ‘one bridge too far’. Based on the discussions and the action plan, CE is now doing further research on the impact of far-reaching measures in the built environment.

The action plan comprises four key elements:a government mechanism putting a cap on fossil energy consumptionefficiency standards for buildings and equipment, wherever possibleincentives for innovation, in the form of temporary grants, etc.removal of barriers.
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Particulate emissions in the building industry and its supply chain]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/particulate_emissions_in_the_building_industry_and_its_supply_chain/450</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/particulate_emissions_in_the_building_industry_and_its_supply_chain/450</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The building industry and the upstream production of building materials are thought to be a major source of particulate emissions. Until now, however, there was no comprehensive review of emission sources and strengths, nor of the influence of emissions on air quality in the workplace and the wider surroundings.

At the request of Infomil, CE has therefore undertaken a survey of emissions and sources, providing insight into:the total particulate emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) arising in the various links in the building material supply chain;the specific activities in each of those links responsible for the greatest contribution to particulate emissions;the estimated share of these sources in ambient air pollutant levels in the Netherlands and Dutch transboundary pollutant emissions;a first-pass review of autonomous trends and potential abatement measures.Based on the sources identified, CE estimates that PM10 and PM2.5 emissions in the building industry supply chain amount to about 3,300 – 5,200 t/year and 2,300 – 2,500 t/year, respectively. Because of the uncertainties in the available information, these figures have been reported as ranges. 

Table 2 of the report shows that average emissions of diesel particulates (PM2.5 and smaller) are around 1000 t/y, those of quartz-containing particulates (PM10) about 1.750- 2.400 t/y and those of toxic process emissions and welding fumes (PM2.5 and smaller) about 600 t/y.

It was found that actual construction work may sometimes have a significant impact on local air quality. 
	
Overall, it is not expected that there will be any significant autonomous reduction in these emissions in the near term. At building sites, however, there is major potential for further reducing both diesel soot emissions and particulate emissions. A substantial cut in diesel emissions can be achieved with particulate filters, while other particulate emissions at construction sites can be reduced by using ‘low-dust’ equipment. It is recommended to employ financial incentives, voluntary agreements, inclusion of due provisions in construction ordinances/directives and certification schemes to encourage implementation of diesel particulate filters and ‘low-dust’ construction site equipment, or make it compulsory. 


]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:21 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[An incentivising benchmark for Sustainable Procurement: Criteria and constraints]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/an_incentivising_benchmark_for_sustainable_procurement%3A_%3Cbr%3Ecriteria_and_constraints/438</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/an_incentivising_benchmark_for_sustainable_procurement%3A_%3Cbr%3Ecriteria_and_constraints/438</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[With an annual procurement budget of around € 28.8 billion the various echelons of government [1] can give a substantial impulse to sustainable procurement of materials and products in the Netherlands. Within the government as well as society at large, a desire has been voiced for introducing a benchmark to promote more sustainable procurement patterns. Against this background CE collaborated with two NGOs – the association of Dutch agencies working on international development cooperation (COS Nederland) and Friends of the Earth-Netherlands (Milieudefensie) – on preparing an inventory of criteria and constraints for an incentivising benchmark. The project was government-funded.

There proved to be plenty of information available on benchmarking for government procurement, enabling CE, Milieudefensie and COS Nederland to set out a solid systematic basis for such a scheme, which could then be taken to municipal authorities to check against the wishes and priorities of potential users. Among the points raised were the need for clarity as to the relationship between policy, process and result indicators, the issue of information availability and the time required for working through the questionnaire. 

This will enable the NGOs to refine their benchmark (see the Dutch-language website www.duurzaamheidsmeter.nl). The benchmark currently under development at SenterNovem was not included in the study. 
________________________________________ 
[1]Local, regional and national government, along with water boards.

]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[An Energy-Agri-Cluster as an alternative to the Zuiderzee rail link]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/an_energy-agri-cluster_as_an_alternative_to_the_zuiderzee_rail_link/397</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/an_energy-agri-cluster_as_an_alternative_to_the_zuiderzee_rail_link/397</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The Energy-Agri-Cluster plan was developed by CE Delft in just a few weeks as a robust, non-transport alternative to the proposed Zuider-zee rail link between Amsterdam and the North of the Netherlands. It is a multi-element programme drawn up as a coherent strategy for improving the North’s economic structure, at the same time giving an impulse to creating a more sustainable national energy supply. This dovetails perfectly with the government’s plans for an Energy Transition, the Energy Valley already operational in the region and the specific features of this area – in particular the major scope for underground CO2 sequestration, the capacity of the Eems Port, and the ‘Agri-cluster’ programme and knowledge infrastructure already in place. The Energy-Agri-Cluster, designed to augment existing government plans, also aims to make the regional economy less sensi-tive to natural gas prices.  

The plan comprises the following core elements: a biomass / coal gasification unit with CO2 storage, a CO2 transport grid, a 2nd-generation ethanol plant, a biorefinery facility, a Blue Energy plant (extracting energy from the freshwater-saltwater interface), a virtual micro-CHP plant and a ‘knowledge network’. The plan, which would require a one-off government subsidy of € 550 million and an additional € 2 billion from private investors, would lead to a CO2 emission reduction of between 5 and 11 Mt annually and create at least 2000 jobs in the long term. 

The Energy-Agri-Cluster has been given a positive assessment by economic consultants Ecorys as well as by a team of experts for the Energy Transition and the Strategic Environmental Assessment committee of the Zuiderzee rail link project.

]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Waste disposal and CO2: Quick scan of the greenhouse gas emissions of the Dutch waste disposal industry, 1990-2004]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/waste_disposal_and_co2%3A_quick_scan_of_the_greenhouse_gas_emissions_of_the_dutch_waste_disposal_industry%2C_1990-2004/416</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/waste_disposal_and_co2%3A_quick_scan_of_the_greenhouse_gas_emissions_of_the_dutch_waste_disposal_industry%2C_1990-2004/416</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[In 2004, the greenhouse gas emissions associated with Dutch waste disposal were substantially lower than in 1990. While in 1990 the sector’s aggregate emissions were still around 12.7 Mt CO2-equivalents, by 2004 they had fallen to 0.8 Mt. This figure allows for the emissions avoided through carbon sequestration in the soil in the case of landfill and composting, and the energy recovered from the burning of waste in municipal incinerators and use of landfill methane. In 1990 the share of the waste disposal industry in Dutch greenhouse gas emissions was still about 6% (for the waste processed that year). In 2004 this had dropped to around 0.5%.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:21 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Environmental analysis of four alternative (bio-)fuels for the Gelderland 13 power station]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/environmental_analysis_of_four_alternative_%28bio-%29fuels_for_the_gelderland_13_power_station/415</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/environmental_analysis_of_four_alternative_%28bio-%29fuels_for_the_gelderland_13_power_station/415</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Like other Dutch power generators, Electrabel has signed up to the ‘Coal Covenant’, a voluntary agreement with national government in which they have pledged to replace part of the coal burned in power stations by biomass. The study is a follow-up to a study dating from August 2005. In the present study, commissioned by Electrabel, the environmental strengths and weaknesses of four different alternative fuels from the earlier study were assessed: corn-cob, rice-residue, palm-seed and eucalyptus pellets. 

The conclusions were as follows:

Rice-residue pellets and corn-cob pellets
The analysis was based on the premise that in the producer country Thailand the rice husks/corn cobs presently used as agricultural fertil-iser could be replaced by artificial fertilisers. In that case, co-firing the rice husks / corn cobs in the Gelderland 13 power station (G13) in pelletized form would mean an improvement in both greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and local air quality in the vicinity of the station.
Eucalyptus pellets
Here, the point of departure was that the portion of the eucalyptus wood not used locally in South Africa is burned there in the open air. Although local use of this biomass within South Africa would be preferable, it does not occur. Co-firing the eucalyptus wood in pelletized form in G13 is therefore again better for GHG emissions as well as local air quality around G13.
Palm-seed pellets
In the case of palm-seed pellets as a supplementary fuel, it depends very much on the current application whether or not there will be environmental gains. If this waste is used as animal fodder, co-firing is probably unfavourable for the environment, because it is likely to mean additional destruction of virgin rainforest or other nature. If it is used as a fertiliser or simply burned, then co-firing of palm-seed pellets is better for GHG emissions. Without additional measures (to remove additional flue-gas NOx), co-firing in G13 will mean a slight deterioration of air quality around the power station.

Overall conclusion
In general, burning these pelletized biofuels in G13 would have a net positive impact on both local air quality around the power station and GHG emissions. The exception is palm-seed pellets, which seem likely to score negatively on both these environmental indicators. ]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:21 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[En route to clean air]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/en_route_to_clean_air/385</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/en_route_to_clean_air/385</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The southern part of the Dutch coastal conurbation (in Dutch: Zuidvleugel)suffers from serious air pollution, with air quality in breach of European standards for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulates (PM10). Improving air quality is therefore a priority issue for both national government and local authorities. At the request of Zuid-Holland provincial executive CE has reviewed the options available for improving air quality, assessing their merits and estimating their cost. On the basis of this review a proposal was drawn up for an effective package of measures that can in principle be implemented in the short term. In assembling this package, we were guided by four main considerations:impact on air quality (i.e. pollutant concentrations);cost effectiveness;practicability (public support / ‘honey and vinegar’);scope for short-term implementation.The report provides an outline description of the air pollution abatement package for the ‘Zuidvleugel’ and a cost estimate for the period 2006-2010.
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Energy conservation in the Dutch natural gas chain]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/energy_conservation_in_the_dutch_natural_gas_chain/386</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/energy_conservation_in_the_dutch_natural_gas_chain/386</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[In the Netherlands the natural gas production and distribution chain consumes about 37 PJ of energy a year, some five per cent of total industrial energy consumption. This study inventories the potential for energy saving down the entire chain: from subsurface gas extraction and treatment, drying and blending, through compressor station and distribution grid operation to the end user’s gas meter. A clear precondition for any energy savings is that the companies operating the various links in the chain cooperate on this issue. This was indeed the case in the present exploratory study, which brought together Dutch gas producers, through their trade association NOGEPA (Netherlands Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Association), Gasunie and Essent Energie. The study was facilitated by SenterNovem.

The conservation options pivot around the four factors of greatest influence on energy consumption: the desired gas quality, gas pressure, fluctuations in gas flow and the distance the gas has to be transported. Three promising measures were selected: greater spread in gas quality, local electrical power generation and reducing pressure in the main transport pipeline grid in the summer.
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[What kind of new power station for the Netherlands?]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/what_kind_of_new_power_station_for_the_netherlands/382</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/what_kind_of_new_power_station_for_the_netherlands/382</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[This report examines what kind of new electrical power station should be built in the Netherlands, from the perspective of investors and the government. Using an investment model developed specially for this study, it was examined whether the postulate that coal based power stations are economically more viable even when taking CO2 emis-sion trading into account is valid in various different scenarios.The findings were then discussed at a public meeting organised by the Dutch Energy Policy Platform.

Calculations with this dedicated investment model indicate that a coal-fired power station without CO2 sequestration is the most attractive investment option only if the price of CO2 emissions remains as low as at present. With higher CO2 emission prices and a price tag on other emissions, too, a coal-fired station with CO2 sequestration gives the best return on investment. This holds for prices from around € 15 per tonne CO2 upwards.

Comparison of investor and government perspectives shows there are important differences as well as similarities, leading to possible conflicts as well as opportunities for collaboration. When it comes to building a new power station in the Netherlands, the debate is likely to focus on the issue of whether it will be a coal-fired station with no extra environmental provisions, or whether government-enforced constraints will make co-firing of biomass and CO2 sequestration profitable. Further, in-depth debate on this topic is essential.
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Free electricity, dirty electricity, no electricity?]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/free_electricity%2C_dirty_electricity%2C_no_electricity/376</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/free_electricity%2C_dirty_electricity%2C_no_electricity/376</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[In recent years the electricity market has been increasingly opened up, with the sector being liberalised and players now preparing for privatisation and further internationalisation of operations. At the request of the Dutch Energy Policy Platform, CE has carried out an (interim) analysis of the impact of these developments on the three traditional ‘mainstays’ of energy policy, that the electricity supply should be:clean (indicator: CO2 emissions)reliable (indicator: security of supply), andaffordable (indicator: company costs / customer tariffs).Overall, it can be concluded that there has been a shift from providing for long-term, societal interests to the attainment of short-term, corporate goals. As a result, the three ‘classic’ aims of energy policy – affordability, reliability and environmental compatibility – are now under threat.

Liberalisation as such is proving to have negative impacts, particularly in terms of environmental compatibility, which are offset only partly by flanking policies. With time, the same will hold for reliability and affordability, too. If societal objectives are to be safeguarded, the situation must be structurally addressed by means of rather more stringent flanking policies.
]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Renewable energy in the new EU member states]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/renewable_energy_in_the_new_eu_member_states/326</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/renewable_energy_in_the_new_eu_member_states/326</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[At the request of the EU-Japan Centre for Industrial Cooperation, CE has carried out a study to assess the status of renewable energy in the ten (East European) countries that joined the EU in 2004. In each new member state current capacity, future potential and the policy setting were reviewed and an individual case study elaborated. ]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:21 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Electricity labelling 2004]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/electricity_labelling_2004/327</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/electricity_labelling_2004/327</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[On 1 January 2005 provisions came into force obliging electricity suppliers and producers to report the shares of various energy sources in the overall fuel mix they supply or produce. Using the data available in January 2005, CE analysed the mix embodied in the electricity supplied to Dutch end users in 2004, distinguishing between domestic production and imports. The CO2 emissions and the volume of nu-clear waste associated with both domestically produced and imported power were also inventoried.]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Sustainability of the transition to bio-ethanol: An exploratory study]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/sustainability_of_the_transition_to_bio-ethanol%3A_an_exploratory_study/354</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/sustainability_of_the_transition_to_bio-ethanol%3A_an_exploratory_study/354</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Large-scale production of bio-ethanol, a biofuel with similar properties to petrol, is already feasible with sugar-containing crops and cereal products as a feedstock, and Royal Nedalco is now researching alternative routes from woody biomass. Expectations are that this new technology will reduce ethanol production costs substantially as well as overall environmental impact. 

CE was commissioned by Royal Nedalco to assess the performance of current and future ethanol production against a set of sustainability criteria, including the extent to which greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced by switching to woody feedstocks. While CO2 emissions are reduced by about 40-60% with current feedstocks, this figure may be as high as 80-90% for future ethanol routes. Because production costs are also expected to decline, this will have a major positive impact on the cost effectiveness of ethanol as a biofuel (i.e. the cost of avoiding one tonne CO2 emission). If the costs and technology develop as assumed in this study, the ultimate cost effectiveness may fall to about 20 to 40 €/tonne CO2-eq. 

]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
		        
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Returned phosphoric acid: waste or not?]]></title>
			<link>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/returned_phosphoric_acid%3A_waste_or_not/343</link>
			<guid>http://www.ce.nl/publicatie/returned_phosphoric_acid%3A_waste_or_not/343</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[At the request of Thermphos, CE has carried out a study to explore the definition of ‘waste’. Thermphos is a supplier of phosphoric acid which, after use, is sent back to the company. On return the spent acid is classified as a waste material, however. This study indicates that reusing this phosphoric acid is environmentally far preferable to treating it as waste and disposing of it accordingly (in controlled land-fill). For Thermphos, the spent acid is a satisfactory raw material and defining it as waste creates an unwarranted financial and administrative burden, as well as being bad for the company’s image.

]]></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:17:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<category>Algemeen</category>
		</item>
		
			</channel>
</rss>
